It also demonstrates the consequences of living in a federal system. The laws on each level are often in tension. And since the people who live in Texas also live in the United States, they can play off this tension. In this case people who disagree with the abortion policies Texas has passed can appeal to the national government and argue they violate laws established on the national level.
It's no guarantee of success, but its a common tactic.
- Click here for the article.
The state law placing restrictions on clinics that provided abortions were argued - by a federal judge in Texas, Judge Lee Yeakel of the District Court for the Western District - to violate guarantees established on the national level. Expect this to wind its way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Here's a key part of the article:
In his ruling, Yeakel wrote that the law's ambulatory surgical center requirement "burdens Texas women in a way incompatible with the principles of personal freedom and privacy protected by the United States Constitution for the 40 years since Roe v. Wade."
Yeakel also said the state had reached a "tipping point" in limiting access to abortion when the ambulatory surgical center requirement is viewed in the context of the other state-imposed regulations. The regulations
Yeakel mentioned include a 24-hour waiting period for abortions and requiring doctors to perform a sonogram on a woman at least 24 hours before she has an abortion.
"The court is firmly convinced that the State has placed unreasonable obstacles in the path of a woman's ability to obtain a previability abortion," Yeakel wrote.
